By whatever name, the Cold War has already begun because the NATO allies meet in Brussels tomorrow to find ways of punishing Russia for its invasion of Georgia. The premise of this search is hostility, not friendship.
At the same time, the invasion and Russia’s victory have revealed the true cost to America and Europe of the wars in Serbia, Iraq and Afghanistan.
Whatever the White House spin on the invasion and its aftermath, people outside the West see that Russia successfully stood by its friends in South Ossetia and Abkhazia.
In contrast, Washington waffled despite Georgia’s coalition with the US and vital strategic importance to the entire West as a route for oil and gas supplies bypassing Russia. Currently, the US is bark without bite because its strength is tied down in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Vassals of the former Soviet empire quickly took shelter in NATO, the European Union or friendship with the US for protection against fresh subjugation by Russia, their historical oppressor. They emerged from a long night to hopes of enjoying national identity and pride in freedom and democracy assisted by the West.
Georgia just lost that pride and its national identity is under threat. Washington may now pour money into it but the humiliation is irreversible of a new nation free for less than 20 years after 190 years of Russian domination.
Poland may also learn a bitter lesson despite its NATO membership and recent agreement giving it patriot missiles and an anti-missile system. Unless the US has the power to deter it, Russia has pledged to point missiles in retaliation at Poland and the Czech Republic.
Diplomacy is the best course when facing powers like Russia but it cannot bring results if the underlying menace of force is not credible.
In the current situation of American weakness, there are few alternatives. Washington may have to acquiesce to South Ossetia and Abkhazia being delinked from Georgia just like Russia did earlier this year when the West supported independence for Kosovo.
It may also have to slow the militarization of Georgia, Poland and the Czech Republic to prevent growing Russian hostility. The Russian government is what it is. Short of overthrowing it, Washington has little choice but to simmer down.
This is lamentable. Russia invaded a close American friend, continues to block its main ports, destroyed its navy and some of its army, and threatens a $4 billion pipeline bringing oil to Europe from Central Asia.
Yet, Washington can muster only rhetoric about “consequences”. Even those, it cannot implement without help from very fractious European partners many of whom take pride in not following its lead.
There is a lot of talk in the US about punishing Russia with “isolation” through a cold shoulder from the G8, refusing entry into the World Trade Organization and slowing cooperation with NATO. This is bravado.
Europeans are hardly likely to stop buying Russian oil and gas to please Washington’s hardliners. Western companies with billion dollar stakes in Russia are also unlikely to pull out.
Russia cannot be isolated in world affairs if most countries outside NATO do not trust the US to protect them from retaliation. Being spurned by the West will hurt Moscow but also motivate it to build bridges with the East and South, where countries now generate enough wealth to buy what Russia has to offer.
That would further delink global wealth creation from reliance on US financial and commercial pathways, thus weakening American soft power.
Some of that delinking is already happening with the rise of the Middle East, Russia, China, India, Brazil, South Africa and a few other emerging economies as new centers of global growth.
Russia has also begun talks to set up new security arrangements involving China and Central Asian countries but excluding the US and Europe.
In the end run, hard power and willingness to use it matter more than soft power. Only hard power can deter Russia or China from militarily entering the territory of America’s friends or coercing them.
Even weak nations like Sudan and Somalia do not change behavior because of American economic sanctions. But the US has no hard power available because of the quagmires of Iraq and Afghanistan. No amount of diplomacy can bridge this shortfall.
Perhaps soft punishments can make people within a country suffer, as in Iran, and eventually force a change of government by causing a rebellion. But that is debatable.
Many countries, including those in Central Asia, take risks to help the US against terrorism or help Europe to reduce dependence on Russian oil and gas. Their friendship is vital.
When such friends get into trouble with Russia or China, there are many good reasons for America to prefer cautious diplomacy. But that does not deter violent retaliation for siding with the US.
The Georgian invasion demonstrates that Washington is powerless to stop friendship with the US from reducing safety instead of increasing it. It was incapable of doing anything concrete during the invasion and acted only after Moscow declared unilateral ceasefire and the European Union secured an agreement.
Then, Condoleezza Rice pressured Mikheil Saakashvili to sign a revised version already cleared with Moscow without letting him raise objections. In today’s treacherous world, this demonstrates that Washington is an unreliable friend.
The question among many non-Americans and non-Europeans, who comprise three quarters of the world, is whether it is worth taking risks to help the US. Without their help Russia cannot be isolated regardless of NATO’s self-important declarations in coming days.
Georgia took risks and look what America did although the US President went personally to Tbilisi to promise unstinting support. Coming back from this one in non-Western eyes will be a long march for Washington.
That leaves a lot of room for Russia to entice those sitting on the fence and to destabilize others who side with the US but worry following the Georgia episode.